How can we use a variety of data-driven speed management strategies to make transportation safer and more efficient for all modes–whether you’re driving, walking or taking transit?

The project was led by Yao Jan Wu, director of the Smart Transportation Lab at the University of Arizona. Co-investigators were Xianfeng Terry Yang of the University of Utah, who researches traffic operations and modeling along with connected automated vehicles, and Sirisha Kothuri of Portland State University, whose research has focused on improving signal timing to better serve pedestrians. Join them on Sept 15, 2021 for a free webinar to learn more.

"We want to improve mobility for all users, be it pedestrians, vehicle drivers or transit riders, and there are different strategies to do this. How do we harness data to drive us to these strategies?" Kothuri said.

Funded by the National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC), this multi-university collaboration addressed the question from three angles:

• Wu and his students in Arizona looked at the impact of speed management strategies on conventional roadways.
• Yang and his team examined the effects of speed management strategies on connected corridors, coordinating with transit signal priority (TSP) systems.
• Kothuri and her PSU team came up with an approach to estimate pedestrian delay at signalized intersections.

The aim of their combined research efforts was to investigate the possibility of developing and implementing more innovative speed management strategies that are effective for multimodal transportation and can be applied in both conventional roadways and "connected" roadways - i.e. equipped with vehicle-to-infrastructure or infrastructure-to-infrastructure communication capabilities.

IMPACT OF SPEED FEEDBACK SIGNS ON TRAFFIC FLOW AND SAFETY

Working with Pima County, Arizona, Wu and the Arizona research team evaluated the mobility and safety impacts of speed feedback signs on conventional roadways. Ina Road, a major signalized arterial in Tucson, was selected as the study corridor. This corridor was chosen because of the existing speed feedback signs along the corridor between signalized intersections, and due to the presence of advanced traffic data collection systems. Traffic data were collected for four weeks (May 28-June 25, 2018), and the existing signs were disabled for two weeks (June 11th-June 25th) during the data collection.

Using MioVision’s TrafficLink platform and high-resolution data, the researchers measured:

• Percentage arrival on red: The percentage of vehicles that arrived at the intersection when the signal was red.
• Split failure: The occurrence of leftover demand (when at least one vehicle in the queue was not able to go, but had to wait for the next green cycle) for a specific approach at an intersection.
• Intersection delay: Total amount of time that all vehicles spend in the intersection queue while waiting to pass the intersection.

For a given time of day before and after disabling the speed feedback signs, only a little variation in traffic flow was observed. Similar traffic flow peaks for all the segments suggest that arterial mobility and traffic flow were not affected by disabling the signs. But what about the signs' effect on safety?

Data from the Pima Association of Governments show that the total number of severe crashes (four) on the study corridor all occurred before implementing the speed feedback signs in 2015. Moreover, using speed as a performance indicator, the researchers found a reduction in drivers' speeds along each link of the corridor, in between intersections (see page 21 of the final report for a table of speed results on weekdays and weekends). The reduction in the link speed was significant during the times the feedback signs were enabled, suggesting a reduced likelihood of severe crashes.

RETIMING SIGNALS FOR TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY

Yang and the Utah team explored the impact of a speed management strategy on a connected corridor in Salt Lake City, Utah: how does signal retiming impact a transit signal priority (TSP) system?

Although TSP is a promising way to reduce bus delays at intersections, improve transit operational reliability, and consequently increase transit ridership with improved service, the effectiveness of TSP is subject to things like bus schedule, signal timing plan, passenger flows, etc. Considering this, the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) adopted a speed management strategy – signal coordination and retiming –  to improve the effectiveness of TSP. UDOT implemented signal coordination along a stretch of Redwood Road, a connected corridor with dedicated short-range communication, and applied several signal timing plans with the aim of maximizing the benefits of TSP. 

In general, researchers found, the average rate of TSP served before signal retiming was 33.13%, which is lower than that of 35.29% after signal retiming. This means that more buses requesting signal priority had their requests met, after the signals were retimed. In other words, the speed management strategies were also helping to improve bus reliability. 

In addition, bus travel time and bus running time were reduced after signal retiming. All of these findings indicate that the speed management strategy implemented along this connected vehicle corridor results in an improvement of TSP and bus service.

ESTIMATING PEDESTRIAN DELAY

There is technology, like signal controllers that can record high-resolution data, capable of recording pedestrian delay; but not every intersection is equipped with this technology because it is costly. Agencies are upgrading their infrastructure when possible, but there are still a lot of intersections where there is no means of knowing how long of a delay a pedestrian may experience. 

The PSU team, led by Kothuri, developed an alternative method for estimating pedestrian delay by using controller data for estimating multimodal signal performance measures.

Traditionally, signal timing is calibrated to prioritize vehicle movement, and long delays for pedestrians can increase noncompliance, causing unnecessary risk. So the team's goal was to find a way to use data to estimate what the pedestrian delay would be, at intersections that are not equipped with the latest infrastructure. Researchers took data from Ina Road, the same study corridor in Pima County, Arizona used to evaluate speed management strategies, and used finite mixture modeling to model pedestrian delay. Results showed that their method was able to successfully model the delay fluctuations with less than 10% mean absolute error. This method can be applied to intersections with similar characteristics as the test intersections. So cities and agencies that do not have signal controllers to capture pedestrian delay can use this finite mixture modeling method to figure out where they need to apply strategies to reduce that delay. 

The application of the proposed method could be beneficial to transportation agencies in three capacities:

1. providing a more reliable, robust, and accurate approach for estimating pedestrian delay at signalized intersections where sensors are not available to collect pedestrian delay;
2. a tool for analyzing the risk of pedestrians violating the signal;
3. calibrating a network-wide model for estimating pedestrian delay at all intersections without the need to use additional resources

OUTCOMES OF THE RESEARCH

An effective strategy for improving mobility needed to consider both motorized and non-motorized modes of transportation. The three main achievements of this project were:

1. Evaluate the impact of speed management strategies along conventional arterials using smart sensor data;
2. Understand the role of conventional speed management strategies in supporting connected arterials;
3. Examine the possibility of using controller event-based data to estimate multimodal signal performance measures.

Improved multimodal speed management strategies foster a safer community that will, in turn, encourage more people to walk and bike. This project addressed data-driven multimodal speed management strategies for traditional corridors using traffic sensors, and for future evaluation of connected vehicle-based strategies. The project also strengthened relationships between the three universities and their local partners, including Pima County and the Utah DOT.

"This project highlighted the strong collaboration we have among the universities. Trying to find innovative solutions during the process tied our universities together, bringing local resources together as well," Wu said.

ABOUT THE PROJECT

Data-Driven Mobility Strategies for Multimodal Transportation

Yao-Jan Wu, University of Arizona; Xianfeng Yang, University of Utah; Sirisha Kothuri, Portland State University

• Download the Final Report (PDF)
• Download the Project Brief (PDF)
• Register for the September 15, 2021 webinar

This research was funded by the National Institute for Transportation and Communities, with additional support from Pima County Public Works Administration, Portland State University, University of Arizona, University of Utah, and Utah Department of Transportation.

RELATED RESEARCH

To learn more about this and other NITC research, sign up for our monthly research newsletter.

• Connected Vehicle System Design for Signalized Arterials
• Improving Walkability Through Control Strategies at Signalized Intersections
• Development Of Low-Cost Radar-Based Sensor For Multi-Modal Traffic Monitoring

Photo by csfotoimages/iStock

The National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC) is one of seven U.S. Department of Transportation national university transportation centers. NITC is a program of the Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) at Portland State University. This PSU-led research partnership also includes the Oregon Institute of Technology, University of Arizona, University of Oregon, University of Texas at Arlington and University of Utah. We pursue our theme — improving mobility of people and goods to build strong communities — through research, education and technology transfer.

Interested in active transportation research? What’s been done? What should be done? 

We’re excited to share the release of the Research Roadmap for the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Council on Active Transportation (CAT). The Roadmap was created to foster research that will address important active transportation needs at the state DOT level and beyond. 

Funded by the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), a team of researchers from the Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) at Portland State University (PSU) and Toole Design prepared the Research Roadmap over the past 18 months. They reviewed existing and on-going active transportation research, identified key research needs from a wide range of sources, and held outreach activities with practitioners to refine and prioritize those needs.

The project offers guidance on where active transportation research has been, and where it should go next in developing speed management strategies to improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety on arterial roadways, determining context-driven optimal spacing between marked crosswalks, addressing racial and economic disparities in safety improvements, refining guidance on bicycle signal timing, overcoming barriers to implementing active transportation in planning and engineering practice, and many more research questions:

• The Research Roadmap provides an introduction and description of the process and methods used to develop the Roadmap. Most importantly, it includes a set of 110 research needs that are grouped into four levels of priority, as well assigned one of six primary topical areas: Data; Design; Equity and Accessibility; Planning; Policy and Practice; Safety; or Technology and Micromobility.
• The Research Review summarizes the existing and ongoing research on 22 topics. These summaries informed the Research Roadmap, and for each topic it dives into what we already know; how research is being done; current research underway; existing reviews; TRID index terms; and other relevant insights.
• A February 2, 2022 Webinar provides an overview of the Research Roadmap.

The team also prepared a Continuity and Implementation Plan for the AASHTO CAT, along with a tracking tool. The NCHRP 20-123(02) project page includes more detailed information.

The PSU team was led by Jennifer Dill, and included Nathan McNeil, Christopher Monsere, Sirisha Kothuri, and John MacArthur. PSU graduate students Ana Navia Peláez and Kyuri Kim assisted with the Research Review. Stefanie Brodie led the team from Toole Design, which included Jessica Schoner, Jeremy Chrzan, James Elliot, Christina Fink, Talia Jacobson, Belinda Judelman, and Frank Proulx. Jacobson and Judelman are alums of the PSU Masters of Urban and Regional Planning (MURP) program. 

Photo by Cait McCusker

The Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) at Portland State University is home to the National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC), the Initiative for Bicycle and Pedestrian Innovation (IBPI), and other transportation programs. TREC produces research and tools for transportation decision makers, develops K-12 curriculum to expand the diversity and capacity of the workforce, and engages students and professionals through education.

Last year, a car driver hit a César Chávez K-8 School student at the intersection of N. Portsmouth Ave and N. Willis Blvd in Portland, OR. It underscored what parents, teachers and Portland community members have been demanding for many years: increased investment in traffic safety at schools during pick up and drop off hours.

What’s more: Portsmouth’s residents already had a lot of ideas of how to improve pedestrian safety at this intersection.

Seeking to help the community take action on these ideas, Safe Routes to School advocacy professionals William Francis and Hanna Howsmon at Community Cycling Center and César Chávez teacher Sam Balto recommended this intersection as a potential quick build project for the Better Block PSU pathway program-–a partnership between the volunteer-led group Better Block PDX and the Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) at Portland State University that pairs transportation students with community-led projects. 

“PSU students support community members with the technical aspects of infrastructure improvements–elevating and materializing their ideas by developing plans, designs, and engineering concepts. It’s a shift from the status quo with a ground-up approach, and their transportation expertise can help community members in navigating the permit process or proposing informed solutions to the city,” shared Hau Hagedorn, TREC Associate Director and Better Block PSU program lead.

Project partner William Francis added, “Community members were plugged into a process that we should not expect them to carry out solely on their own. Strong community-led work requires a mindset in which planners and engineers are looking for ways to say "yes" to community ideas as opposed to reaching for reasons to say "no".”

After undergoing development with PSU’s Urban Planning students in the Fall of 2020, this project was chosen to move onto the second phase with the Spring 2021 PSU Civil Engineering course. The team of thirteen civil engineering students was led by soon-to-be graduate Raymond Poss (now a WSDOT technician). 

“We were given a blank slate to work with, and pushed outside of our comfort zone by Instructor Evan Kristof– but he was always there to bail us out if we went too deep. Unique to this engineering class, we had to learn public speaking skills working with clients and accept that not every solution fits perfectly into a box,” shared Raymond. “We experienced a lot of growth in pitching ideas, making mistakes, and supporting one another in finding solutions. Recognizing and learning to accept the limitations of real-world transportation challenges felt good in the end, and it increased our capacity to work holistically with our counterparts in planning wherever we go next.”

Pooling their collective cultural and technical knowledge, the PSU civil engineering students designed an online survey in three languages: English, Spanish, and Arabic. With the invaluable support of the Community Cycling Center, they bridged the digital divide by handing out printed half-sheet surveys through the CCC’s weekly food-delivery-by-bike program.

The residents of Portsmouth had a lot to say about what was needed to improve pedestrian safety at that intersection, and some had a clear idea of how to get it done:

• Portsmouth in general feels very unsafe. I avoid it at all costs, on bike or in a car. The area needs more refuge islands like was done on Saint Louis Ave in St Johns.
• I’ve seen multiple accidents at this intersection due to irresponsible driving. If people aren’t present, cars often don’t even stop, especially in the late evening.
• Muchos no respetan las señales de alto. [Many do not respect the stop signs.]
• A stop light or crosswalk light would be so valuable here. I have kids that walk to school everyday - and I would love to be able to send them on their own, but as of now I don't trust the drivers on Willis/Portsmouth to see them or stop for them.
• A raised table across the intersection or raised crosswalks for all 4 crossings.
   
• Cars heading North on Portsmouth make the right hand turn (Eastbound) on Willis try to make a turn lane around the cars that are stopped to go straight (Northbound). This is particularly dangerous when I am making the same Eastward turn on my bike (I head south on Portsmouth and turn left). They are already into their turn before they see me in the intersection. Most of them have not stopped when they have gone around the Northbound car that is stopped.

Guided by PSU engineering professor Evan Kristof and community feedback, the civil engineering students assessed the site conditions and project data to develop four pop-up alternatives along with a scoring criteria (download the full Better Block PSU presentation - PDF).

1. Pop-Up Alternative - Mini-Roundabout: To slow down drivers by obstructing their path in order to ensure pedestrian safety.
2. Pop-Up Alternative - Bump-outs: To slow down drivers by reducing road width in order to ensure pedestrian safety.
3. Pop-Up Alternative - Raised Crosswalk: Acts like a speed bump to slow down traffic and provide a safer pedestrian crossing medium.
4. Pop-Up Alternative - No Build: Maintain the current state of the intersection. (provides baseline)

The scoring criteria considered: ADA Accessibility; Aesthetics; Complexity; Constructability; Cost; ​​Ability to Encourage Active Transportation; Data Collection; Pop-Up Longevity; Safety Improvements; Vehicle Complete Stops; Lowering Speeds; Large Vehicle Accessibility; and Visibility.

The mini-roundabout and bump-outs came pretty close in their final scores, and the team moved forward with a facility design for a pop-up mini-roundabout. They weighed the pros and cons of three different materials:

• Mixed Media (Straw Wattle; Hay Bales; Plants; Paint)
• Spray Chalk Mural
• Deck Stain and Traffic Paint Mural

The student team considered methods for manual traffic counts; how to navigate the permitting process; and developed a temporary traffic control plan. Taking the idea a step further, they laid out the potential design and solutions for a permanent mini-roundabout at N. Portsmouth Ave and N. Willis Blvd. 

“We had to navigate a complicated mix of different engineering standards we needed to meet at the city, state and federal level. I was surprised to find that there was not a lot of emphasis on pedestrian safety at the federal level,” said Raymond.

Inspired by the City of Portland’s Bike-to-Books annual design contest, Raymond shared that one of the highlights of the project for him was creating a coloring sheet for community members to design and envision a mini-roundabout mural that reflects local culture and values.

Now handed off to TREC, project team partners, and the César Chávez School community, we’re seeking to work with the Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT) to secure a permit for a three-day community event that would allow for a temporary roundabout installation. 

“We’re looking to host this community event in the Fall, before the school re-opens, so we can bring the community together to collaborate and raise awareness of traffic safety around César Chávez,” emphasized long-time Better Block PDX volunteer leader Ryan Hashagen. “This is an opportunity to showcase what the community and PSU students have to offer, and engage the city in discussing a long-term solution to pedestrian safety.”

Interested in getting involved in this community event? Contact Hau Hagedorn at hagedorn@pdx.edu.

ADDITIONAL PROJECT INFO

Download the full Better Block PSU presentation for this project here (PDF). The PSU civil engineering team included:

Angelica Ruiz

Anh Hoang

Ben Rezq

Cory Aasland

Jacob Rollins

Jane Aldagher

Jean Rwandika

Julianne Chesnutt

Leon Munirah

Maribel Pena

Myla Cross

Raymond Poss

Salvador Mercado

Trevor Mace

Photo by Sam Balto

The Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) at Portland State University is home to the National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC), the Initiative for Bicycle and Pedestrian Innovation (IBPI), and other transportation programs. TREC produces research and tools for transportation decision makers, develops K-12 curriculum to expand the diversity and capacity of the workforce, and engages students and professionals through education.

Dr. Huajie Yang, who graduated in 2020 with a PhD in Urban Studies and Planning from Portland State University, devoted his doctoral research to studying the impacts of light rail transit. His dissertation, "Short-term and Long-term Effects of New Light Rail Transit Service on Transit Ridership and Traffic Congestion at Two Geographical Levels," quantitatively examines the effect of new Light Rail Transit (LRT) services on transit ridership and traffic congestion over time.

Connect with Huajie Yang on LinkedIn

Yang examined light rail's impacts at two different geographic levels. At the corridor level, he conducted case studies of two light rail lines in the Portland, Oregon region (TriMet's Green and Orange MAX lines). At the regional level, he used a synthetic control method to construct a control Urbanized Area that closely approximates the counterfactual transit ridership and traffic congestion scenario - in the absence of light rail projects - in three urbanized areas across America.

The results of the corridor-level study suggest that both the Green and Orange lines increased transit ridership in the short and long term, and relieved traffic congestion in the short term, while having no statistically significant effect on traffic congestion in the long term, likely due to induced traffic demand. Results of the regional-level study suggest that, while new light rail transit services contributed to transit ridership in most urban areas, they did relieve traffic congestion in a limited number of urban areas, and that the effect changed over time and varied across places. The comprehensively temporal and geographical analysis will provide a better understanding of the impacts of new light rail transit services on transit ridership and traffic congestion, and hence provides policy makers insightful suggestions for building light rail projects to be more sustainable and to more effectively attract riders from former automobile drivers.

Photo courtesy of TriMet

The Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) at Portland State University is home to the National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC), the Initiative for Bicycle and Pedestrian Innovation (IBPI), and other transportation programs. TREC produces research and tools for transportation decision makers, develops K-12 curriculum to expand the diversity and capacity of the workforce, and engages students and professionals through education.

Portland State University TREC researchers Kelly Clifton, Kristin Tufte and John MacArthur are among the co-authors of a May 2021 article published in Harvard Data Science Review. The paper, "Urban Sustainability Observatories: Leveraging Urban Experimentation for Sustainability Science and Policy," offers an outline of the requirements and research challenges involved in designing effective policies to meet sustainability goals for cities.

Humanity is experiencing revolutionary changes in the 21st century, including accelerating urbanization, the introduction of disruptive mobility technology services, and new sources of data generated and consumed by urban and mobility processes. However, the environmental, social, and economic sustainability implications of these new mobility services are unclear given the complex nature of urban systems and the multifaceted, contested nature of sustainability goals. The article discusses the concept of urban sustainability observatories that leverage urban experimentation through ongoing data collection and analysis capabilities. The researchers also discuss challenges in building and sustaining these observatories and how university, community, and industry partnerships may establish successful observatories that serve as critical drivers of research, technology transfer, and commercialization. 

Photo by hapabapa/iStock

The Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) at Portland State University is home to the National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC), the Initiative for Bicycle and Pedestrian Innovation (IBPI), and other transportation programs. TREC produces research and tools for transportation decision makers, develops K-12 curriculum to expand the diversity and capacity of the workforce, and engages students and professionals through education.

We're proud to announce the publication of a new NITC dissertation: "Methodologies to Quantify Transit Performance Metrics at the System-Level," by Travis Glick of Portland State University.

Performance metrics have typically focused at two main scales: a microscopic scale that focuses on specific locations, time-periods, and trips; and, a macroscopic scale that averages metrics over longer times, entire routes, and networks. When applied to entire transit systems, microscopic methodologies often have computational limitations while macroscopic methodologies ascribe artificial uniformity to non-uniform analysis areas. These limitations highlight the need for a middle approach. This dissertation presents a mesoscopic analysis based around timepoint-segments, which are a novel application of an existing system for many transit agencies.

In the United States, fix-route transit is typically defined by a small subset of bus stops along each route, called timepoints. For this research, routes are divided into a consecutive group of bus stops with one timepoint at the center. Each timepoint-segment includes all data collected in that segment during one hour of operation. Visuals for congestion and headway performance, based on the aggregated datasets, are designed to examine transit performance along a route, between routes, and for specific segments. These visuals are a potentially useful tool for evaluating performance along routes and for identifying areas that may require a closer examination.

The methodologies for data cleaning, regression modeling, and performance visuals, provide a foundation for how timepoint-segments may prove useful to researchers and agencies.

ABOUT THE PROJECT

Methodologies to Quantify Transit Performance Metrics at the System-Level

Travis Glick, Portland State University

• Download the final report (PDF)

Photo by jorgeantonio/iStock

RELATED RESEARCH

To learn more about this and other NITC research, sign up for our monthly research newsletter.

• Improving Integration of Transit Operations and Bicycle Infrastructure at the Stop Level
• Visual Exploration of Utah Trajectory Data and their Applications in Transportation
• Using High-Resolution Bus Detection Data to Improve Travel Time Prediction and Identify Urban Congestion Spots

The National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC) is one of seven U.S. Department of Transportation national university transportation centers. NITC is a program of the Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) at Portland State University. This PSU-led research partnership also includes the Oregon Institute of Technology, University of Arizona, University of Oregon, University of Texas at Arlington and University of Utah. We pursue our theme — improving mobility of people and goods to build strong communities — through research, education and technology transfer.

Our multi-year study on automated transit fare collection offers a key finding that won't surprise you: Despite the convenience, the rush toward cashless fare systems has created barriers for lower-income riders seeking to use transit. Results from focus groups, surveys, and a review of current transit agency practices suggest that continuing to accept cash is a crucial way to keep transit accessible. However, dealing with cash has drawbacks: it’s time intensive and expensive. Using a detailed cost-benefit model, the researchers explored the costs for agencies to maintain some cash options and found that some simple approaches can be quite effective. The best bang for the buck? Cash collection on board buses.

Launched in 2019, the research project "Applying an Equity Lens to Automated Payment Solutions for Public Transportation" was supported by a Pooled Fund grant program from the National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC) and conducted at three universities: Portland State University (PSU), the University of Oregon (UO), and the University of Tennessee, Knoxville (UTK). The other funding partners were City of Eugene, OR, City of Gresham, OR, Lane Transit District, Clevor Consulting Group, and RTD (Regional Transportation District) Denver.

Aaron Golub of PSU served as the principal investigator, with co-investigators Anne Brown of UO, Candace Brakewood of UTK and John MacArthur of PSU.

WHY STUDY CASHLESS TRANSIT FARE?

Automated payment technologies can smooth operations and improve data collection, but the added convenience for the agency and some riders comes at a price: those systems require riders to have access to private internet, smartphones, and banking/credit services. Access that is decidedly not universal. What happens to the riders who are left behind?

Fare payment systems have a long history in significant equity challenges - both in fare amounts, but also in how and where fare can be purchased and stored. The final report “Applying an Equity Lens to Automated Payment Solutions for Public Transportation” (PDF) is a detailed exploration of how transit riders pay for their fare, based on 2,303 intercept surveys and three focus groups with transit riders in Colorado and Oregon. Researchers looked at the use of cash, and focused on riders who may be excluded if cash options are removed as new fare payment systems are implemented in the coming years. The research team also interviewed employees at ten transit agencies to find out how their fare payment has been modernized in the past 5 years, how those agencies have evaluated the equity implications of these changes, and what programs they have deployed to mitigate the equity impacts.

Andrew Martin, Development Planner at Lane Transit District, served on the project's technical advisory committee. "Around the same time as this study, we were in the middle of purchasing and implementing our first electronic fare collection system. We had already decided to take a more customer-centric approach: instead of going completely cash-free, we determined that we were going to take on the costs of making sure our service remained accessible to all riders. It was good to see, in the research, a lot of the things that we were intuitively feeling turned out to be true. The cost-benefit analysis shows that the cost isn't as great as you think; by doing the equity mitigations, you might end up with higher ridership and offset the revenue loss," Martin said.

SOME KEY FINDINGS

Researchers found that a significant number (around 30%) of transit riders still rely heavily on paying cash on-board buses. Older and lower-income respondents had less access to smartphones and internet. 

Of those who do own smartphones, many are concerned about reaching data limits, and some depend solely on public Wi-Fi for internet connectivity. 

A small but significant number of riders (around 7%) have no access to formal banking services.

The researchers worked with transit organizations in three case cities: Eugene, OR (population 247,421); Denver, CO (population 2,374,203); and Portland, OR (population 1,849,898). The cost-benefit model can be used by any size agency to implement new fare payment technology.

"One thing that would be really helpful to a lot of agencies is the cost modeling [the researchers] did. It estimates the general cost to put new technologies out there, like ticket vending machines. A lot of smaller agencies may not have things like that, and they're really useful for customers. So even aside from the equity focus, there is a lot of good info on costs of implementing a system," said Martin.

COST BENEFIT MODEL

Researchers constructed a quantitative cost-benefit model that combines first-year capital investments along with 10 years of maintenance, operations and capital replacement into a single total cost estimate. This approach creates an overall reflection of the lifecycle costs of the fare payment system, meaning it enables us to understand the total cost from both the initial costs, as well as the recurring annual costs.

They then used the model to explore and compare four scenarios along with an additional base (no-cash) case. Scenarios are based on the feedback received from transit agencies and a review of best practices nationally: 

• Base - (No cash accepted anywhere)
• Scenario 1 - No cash anywhere, adds retail network
• Scenario 2 - Cash on board, not at TVMs, no retail
• Scenario 3 - Cash only at TVMs, no retail
• Scenario 4 - Cash accepted everywhere

"The heart of this cost-benefit model is, how many riders cannot ride under the different scenarios? We were able to study more than 2,000 riders, and, in the fully no-cash base case, we knew that about 8% of riders could not ride, based on our surveys. Their answers to how they would  ride with different configurations of ticket vending machines and cash on board informed this model," Golub said.

SELECTING MITIGATION STRATEGIES

Any of the above scenarios 1-4, above the no-cash baseline, can mitigate some of the equity implications of going cashless. Which scenario is best for a particular setting depends greatly on how many riders are potentially excluded by a cashless fare system, and on which options those riders would most likely use, given the opportunity to pay with cash. Based on the results of the cost-benefit analysis for each of the three case cities, researchers developed some general principles that agencies should keep in mind, when choosing strategies to help keep transit accessible. 

"When you're looking at 10 different systems and you've got to justify to the board, the general manager, the community, why you're spending money a certain way – it's really helpful to have research like this that shows that the costs are not some huge amount. When equity is cheap to obtain, it's really easy to justify doing that," Martin said.

Larger agencies spend less to collect fare. This impacts the cost-benefit calculation of adding additional capabilities. Small agencies, the researchers suggest, should seriously consider going fare-free. The Eugene case study (the smallest agency) shows that, across the board, fare collection consumes a large part of fare revenues - in the full cash scenario, about 40% of revenue is spent on collecting fare. 

Retail is a low-cost option: Accepting cash payments at retail locations is by far the lowest cost option to add cash capabilities in terms of total cost, net costs, and in terms of cost to accommodate potentially excluded riders. It is also the most commonly used mitigation, according to interviews with agencies. However, the retail network still poses significant geographical barriers for many riders, and does not offer the kind of coverage and access that cash collection on-board would offer.

Simple cash collection on buses could be an important bridge: According to the ridership survey data, in addition to being a low-cost option for agencies, this mitigation also added significant ridership. Accepting cash at ticket vending machines was found to be much more expensive than accepting cash on board.

When larger numbers of riders are excluded, equity mitigations are cheaper. The larger number of riders that are excluded, the bigger impact equity mitigations have and the cheaper they are per additional rider, and per additional fare collected. The Portland-Gresham case study showed relatively few riders were excluded when cash was eliminated compared to the other properties. That meant that adding retail cash collection cost $0.27 per new boarding. In Denver and Eugene, larger populations of riders were potentially excluded by cashless fare, and adding retail capabilities only cost 14 and 1.9 cents per boarding, respectively.

"Within the 10-year transition, some of the worst effects could be avoided by using some of these mitigations,” Golub told NextCity in a May 25, 2021 article: What Happens When Cash Fares Are Eliminated?

This research was funded by the National Institute for Transportation and Communities; the City of Eugene, OR, City of Gresham, OR, Lane Transit District, Clevor Consulting Group, and RTD (Regional Transportation District) Denver.

ABOUT THE PROJECT

Applying an Equity Lens to Automated Payment Solutions for Public Transportation

Aaron Golub and John MacArthur, Portland State University; Anne Brown, University of Oregon; Candace Brakewood, University of Tennessee, Knoxville

• Download the Final Report (PDF)
• Download the Project Brief (PDF)
• Read a 2020 blog post by Aaron Golub: The Hidden Costs of Removing the Option to Pay for Transit With Cash?
• Watch the recorded webinar from May 11, 2021
• Download the cost-benefit model (Excel spreadsheet)

Photo courtesy of TriMet

RELATED RESEARCH

To learn more about this and other NITC research, sign up for our monthly research newsletter.

• New Mobility For All: Can Targeted Information And Incentives Help Underserved Communities Realize The Potential Of Emerging Mobility Options?
• National Scan of Bike Share Equity Programs
• The Connection between Investments in Bus Stops, Ridership, and ADA Accessibility

The National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC) is one of seven U.S. Department of Transportation national university transportation centers. NITC is a program of the Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) at Portland State University. This PSU-led research partnership also includes the Oregon Institute of Technology, University of Arizona, University of Oregon, University of Texas at Arlington and University of Utah. We pursue our theme — improving mobility of people and goods to build strong communities — through research, education and technology transfer.

This story is adapted from two sources; a story published by the Center for Transportation Studies and one from a 2007 Oregon Transportation Research and Education Consortium (OTREC) newsletter.

Transportation research and education has had a long, rich history at Portland State University. Looking back on that history, TREC is celebrating the achievements of an early advocate for transportation studies on the PSU campus: Dr. Walter H. Kramer. 

PSU is a national leader in transportation studies and research, with TREC - the Transportation Research and Education Center - serving as the interdisciplinary hub connecting urban planning, civil engineering, and other disciplines to mobility. We take full advantage of our university's location in one of the most innovative transportation networks in the U.S. – Portland, Oregon. Since 2005 we have also led a collaborative, federally-funded UTC research program dedicated to improving the mobility of people and goods. But before TREC existed, transportation had another home at PSU: the Center for Transportation Studies, or CTS.

Dr. Kramer joined PSU in 1965 as a tenured professor with a transportation studies specialty, and the following year CTS was founded within the PSU Department of Marketing (now the School of Business Administration). Prior to his founding CTS, there was no dedicated school or department at PSU that elevated transportation as a discipline. Dr. Kramer devoted himself toward bringing “the resources of the faculty to bear on the [transportation] problems of the community.”

Since Dr. Kramer’s retirement in 1987, transportation research and education has continued to grow at PSU: in the degrees and courses offered, the students specializing in transportation at the College of Urban and Public Affairs and the Maseeh College of Engineering and Computer Science, and the multidisciplinary faculty being engaged in transportation issues. Dr. Kramer saw PSU’s students capable of “determin[ing] the future of our cities, our society” through multimodal solutions.

Beginning with a donation by Dr. Kramer’s daughter (pictured left) and her husband, Mary Jo and Chris Chapman, a Walter H. Kramer Endowed Transportation Fellowship was established in 2007. The annual fellowship provides financial support to PSU graduate students enrolled in transportation-related graduate programs and working on multi-disciplinary, multimodal research. Over the past fourteen years, this scholarship has supported the work of students who are engaged with tackling the transportation system challenges facing us today. The most recent recipient of the Walter H. Kramer Fellowship is current PSU student Darshan Chauhan who is pursuing his PhD in civil engineering after completing his masters at PSU.

In 1968, the Portland State Viking magazine featured Professor Kramer in a four page feature (excerpts included here along with accompanying photographs):

Walter Kramer wears an easy smile. This smile he uses in his teaching of traffic management, retail management and water transportation classes. "Really, I find my occupation so exciting, I'm not interested in much else." Kramer is from Atlanta, GA. He brought his occupation to Portland State College (PSC) three years ago because of his interest in Portland and "what Governor McCall calls 'the quality of life.'"

Kramer believes the actions of an individual, of a college, can determine the future of our cities, our society. "Speaking as a member of the faculty I really think that PSC can be whatever I like it to be. It can be as good a school as I'm willing to make it. It can be a reflection of my own meagerness and sloth. Whatever its shortcomings the faculty has the power, if it wills, through hard work, to overcome them.

The great advantage of Portland State College [renamed to Portland State University in 1969] is its role as the urban college in the educational system. It arrives on the scene when the great domestic problem is the rapid urbanization of society. There's really great potential here. We can help build something in a meaningful way." 

With a continuing commitment to sustainable urban design and transportation, TREC is proud to carry on the legacy of Dr. Kramer. We are grateful for the foresight of the founding director of the Center for Transportation Studies. Reflecting back upon the original mission, and the philosophies of its director, it is clear that PSU's current mission is still building upon its history.

The Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) at Portland State University is home to the National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC), the Initiative for Bicycle and Pedestrian Innovation (IBPI), and other transportation programs. TREC produces research and tools for transportation decision makers, develops K-12 curriculum to expand the diversity and capacity of the workforce, and engages students and professionals through education.

Last month, Portland State University announced the 2021 awards for faculty and staff excellence for research, graduate mentoring and research administration. The awards are among the university's highest honors. The 2021 Presidential Career Research Award recipient is Jennifer Dill. Dill is a professor in the Nohad A. Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning, Director of the Transportation Research & Education Center at PSU, and Director of the National Institute for Transportation and Communities, a national university transportation center funded by the U.S. Department of Transportation.

TREC Communications Director Cait McCusker interviewed Dr. Dill last week to learn more about the origin and trajectory of her career in transportation research at PSU.

What led you to choose transportation research as your career?

Growing up in the 1970’s, I was surrounded by environmental issues. It was the time of the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, the EPA, Earth Day, pollution, the oil crisis...all of that shaping my view on the world. When I went to undergraduate at UC Davis I knew I wanted to do something related to environmental policy and cities. Cities held a certain fascination for me, and in college I started putting all the pieces together and recognizing the huge impact that transportation has on urban areas and the environment. Transportation appealed to both the quantitative, analytical side of me, and also the people-oriented side of me that wanted to see the tangible impacts first hand.

I got a master's degree in planning at UCLA and I started working for the US Environmental Protection Agency doing air quality work with a focus on transportation. That's what I did until I decided to get a PhD and dig in deeper. The field of transportation just offered me so many good job opportunities.

Do you have a particular teacher or mentor that made an impact on you?

There’s definitely two people in my life that stand out: Dan Sperling and Marty Wachs.

Dan Sperling was my professor as an undergrad student at UC Davis, and he hired me to do research alongside him. We wrote my first TRB paper together! As an undergraduate, that was a big deal. He even invited me to the grad seminars where I got the opportunity to connect with PhD students. The confidence that he had in me was very supportive.

At UCLA Marty Wachs was my advisor as a graduate student, and again at UC Berkeley when I pursued my PhD. I’ve been thinking about Marty a lot lately. He passed away just a few weeks ago [read a memoriam for Marty Wachs from U.C. Berkeley]. He gave me so many opportunities, and in addition to being a leading scholar who did interesting work - he was a role model for how I serve as a professor today. He was a very caring person who spent a lot of time with his students. He had so many of them, but he managed to make each of his students feel special. He was an engineer, but also such a people person. He placed a big importance on ethics and serving underrepresented people in his transportation work.

There have certainly been others instrumental to my growth, particularly later on in my career I’ve developed peer networks of women that I lean on for insight and connection.

How has your 20 year tenure at Portland State University influenced you or your work? 

Teaching at an institution that values engaged learning and research is important to me. Portland State’s motto, “Let knowledge serve the city”, is the sentiment that motivated me to get a PhD in the first place. It’s allowed me to do the type of applied research that’s going to have a direct impact on practice and policies in cities. It’s not purely academic or just about citations. Portland more broadly has a lot of public institutions that are willing to engage with the university, which is so great.

Do you have any memories at PSU that you are particularly fond of?

I’ve been pretty happy here at PSU. When I think of some of the most fun I’ve had, it’s been in one-on-one conversations with students. Working together on a research project, in advising sessions, and just seeing where they go after graduation. I’m lucky to have had so many of my past students stay in the Portland area.

A funny, but not fond, memory I have was September 2001 – my first week as a PSU faculty member at CUPA [College of Urban and Public Affairs]. I was running to catch a bus, and there was this lip of the curb where the street car tracks descended and I just landed funny. I had broken my foot and spent the rest of my first term teaching in a boot. I was the new transportation professor at PSU and here I am, brand new to my role, with a broken foot from public transportation. I’m glad I can laugh about it now.

One memory that really stands out to me is getting the news in December 2016 that we won the UTC competition for the FAST Act and continuing on with our NITC program. And for that matter, also the memory of getting the news that we won the UTC competition for MAP-21 in 2013. The shared excitement with my team, and just having that recognition of our expertise was really wonderful.

What has Directing TREC and the NITC program meant to you?

Having an impact on practice and the partnerships we’ve built from TREC, the Transportation Research and Education Center here at PSU, along with our collaborative research program, NITC. One of the biggest challenges of collaboration is finding the people that you just honestly enjoy working with, that are also smart and do great work. NITC is not just a contractual grant where we divy up money. It’s a real collaboration and we work so well together.

We've been able to build on this partnership and our body of work on multimodal transportation. We focus on work that matters, and not just counting the number of citations or journal articles.

What research contribution have you made to the transportation profession that is most meaningful to you? 

What stands out to me the most is bikeway research I’ve done around bike boxes, green lanes, and bike boulevards. And, I have to give credit to my colleague Joe Broach for the analysis work, but the data collected demonstrate that bike boulevards support closing the gender gap in cycling. This larger body of work, often in collaboration with Chris Monsere and Nathan McNeil, provided clear evidence that infrastructure matters, and changes to it can influence behavior in a positive and safer way. These projects started out with a local focus, but expanded nationally.

A lot of people link me to the Four Types of Cyclists, and while I did the empirical research to look at it nationally - the concept was originally created by the City of Portland’s Bicycle Coordinator Roger Geller.

More recently, the work that I’m excited about is around equity in bike share programs which is now being carried further by my colleagues John MacArthur, Nathan McNeil, and Joe Broach.

Is there anything you’re working on right now that you’re really excited about?

Definitely the Research Roadmap for the AASHTO Council on Active Transportation that we’re finishing up right now. The draft is under review by the Council and the panel, and I’m excited about it. This opportunity has really given me the time to focus on the broad spectrum of active transportation research, and see just how much is going on right now. The field is constantly evolving though, and I already have some changes I want to make right up until the last minute to make it as current as possible. Call me dedicated! I really feel that this roadmap is going to be useful to a lot of people.

Is there a research question that you would love to explore if given the opportunity?

I’ve been working in this field, that is - getting people out of their cars - since 1989. In the beginning, we did not have good evidence for the things we knew instinctively around multimodal  infrastructure and policy. In this world of regulation and planning you have to have that evidence and numbers. So much of my career has centered around gathering that evidence.

It’s 2021, and now we’re in a place where we usually know what works, and we have the proof. Sure, we could replicate studies and quantify it in more ways, but how many more details are necessary to take action and invest in change? We know what needs to be done to make our streets safer for people to bike and walk and take transit.

The biggest barriers right now are political implementation and institutional infrastructure. How do we change decision-making in the transportation industry, at all levels? How can we influence and motivate practitioners and the middle managers to implement changes? How do we remove barriers like changing the MUTCD? That’s the holdup. I do think there is a field of research for this. It may not seem as obvious or in line with traditional research practices, and it’s definitely more challenging and time consuming work. But it’s what I want to spend more time exploring.

I would also love to spend more time on how to close the gender gap in cycling, in particular how to encourage tween and teen girls to get interested in bicycling.

Do you have any advice for transportation researchers just starting out in the industry?

When I published my first paper on bicycling research in 2003, written during my 1st year at PSU, I did hesitate. Bicycling? Is that really the research stream of work that is going to get me tenured at PSU and funded? But it’s what I was passionate about. There wasn’t much out there when I started, but research on bikes has exploded.

Focus on your passion, on what you’re really concerned about even if you don’t think others will consider it “serious” enough, valid or trendy. Stick with it. If you’re committed to the work, your peers will notice. For example, recently there has (thankfully) been an increasing focus on equity, race and racism in transportation, and even just a few years ago you would have senior people discouraging young scholars from pursuing that research. Now there is a huge demand for better understanding this intersection.

The Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) at Portland State University is home to the National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC), the Initiative for Bicycle and Pedestrian Innovation (IBPI), and other transportation programs. TREC produces research and tools for transportation decision makers, develops K-12 curriculum to expand the diversity and capacity of the workforce, and engages students and professionals through education.

See the full, original article "PSU Announces Recipients of Prestigious University Research and Mentoring Awards", authored by Shaun McGillis, Research and Graduate Studies, PSU. Below is an excerpt:

Portland State University announces the 2021 awards for excellence for research, graduate mentoring and research administration. The awards are among the university's highest honors. They recognize and incentivize PSU faculty and staff excellence in research, scholarship, artistry and dedication to PSU students.

Recipients of the awards are some of the most dynamic faculty and staff members at PSU. Colleagues submit nominations; a jury of peers selects awardees based on the significance and quality of their research or creative achievements and extraordinary commitment to creating an environment supportive of research and student success. Join us as we celebrate this year’s awardees at the Research Awards Ceremony (online Friday, 3:30 - 5 PM Pacific) during Research Week (May 3-7).

Presidential Career Research Award: Dr. Jennifer Dill

The 2021 Presidential Career Research Award recipient is Jennifer Dill. Dill is a professor in the Nohad A. Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning and Director of the Transportation Research & Education Center at PSU. TREC houses the National Institute for Transportation and Communities, a national university transportation center funded by the U.S. Department of Transportation.

TREC Researcher Profile | Jennifer Dill website and blog | Jennifer Dill Twitter

Professor Dill is an internationally known scholar researching the relationships between transportation, land use, health and the environment, focusing on active transportation. Before entering academia, Professor Dill worked as an environmental and transportation planner in California. That experience motivates her teaching and research, which aims to inform practice and policy. She has published extensively in peer-review journals and has served as principal investigator or co-PI on over $4.3M in research projects and over $28M in federal center funding. Her research has been covered by Wired, Governing, USA Today, the PBS NewsHour, Here and Now, Marketplace and the Atlantic. She has served on and chaired Transportation Research Board committees and is on the editorial boards of the Journal of Transportation and Health, Transportation Research Record and the Journal of Transportation and Land Use. Professor Dill also serves on the Board of Trustees for the TransitCenter, a foundation that works to improve public transit across the U.S.

"Dr. Dill is a very accomplished and prominent researcher and is well-respected in her field," said Chris Monsere, professor and chair of Civil & Environmental Engineering. "Her research aims to understand people's everyday travel decisions, focusing on bicycling, walking and transit. Her scholarship informs our understanding of travel decisions, how the built environment influences travel decisions and how those decisions impact our health."